

A Paper read before the Berkeley ■ Club, 
by JOHN H. BO ALT, 

. k 

August, 1877. 






j 


X 


















■* m 


It 



THE CHINESE QUESTION. 


Two Jfon.Assimilating Races Never Yet Lived Together Harmoniously on the Same Soil 
Unless One of these haces was in a State of Servitude to the Other. 

I do not think that in the whole history of the world from the 
earliest ages down to the present day one single instance can be 
cited where this proposition has proyed untrue. Of course since 
there are degrees in assimilation there are degrees in the antago¬ 
nism caused by non-assimilation; and there may have been cases 
where this antagonism was less than in other cases. There may 
even have been cases where it has in time finally died out, but 
never, as far as I have been able to discover, has the antagonism 
ceased until the cause was removed, and in every instance tho 
extent of the one has borne a definite proportion to the degree 
of the other. 

By the assimilation of two races is meant, the bringing or com¬ 
ing together of the individual members of these races in sue)', 
intimate association that there ceases to" be any race separation 
between them, and the two finally become blended into one na¬ 
tion. It is the breaking down of all barriers of race and colei. 
and education and prejudice, the identification of interests, the 
acceptance of the same laws, the adoption of the same customs, 
and, in short, the admission of absolute equality as far as race is 
concerned, by all, for all, and among all, politically, morally 
and socially. 

Without intimate social relations assimilation is impossible. 
The identity of business interests which has done and is doing 
so much else is powerless here. The Hebrews of Rome never 
became Italians ; the Greeks of Constantinople never became 
Turks. But a drouth in Turkey injured the Greek as much as 
the Ottoman; and a season of plent}^ in Italy was as welcome to 
the Jew as the Gentile. 



2 


Assimilation is never complete until intermarriage is so fre¬ 
quent as no longer to excite comment. But this must be honor¬ 
able marriage, and not concubinage, for marriage is evidence of 
respect as signifying a union with an equal, while concubinage 
is an indication of contempt, and has always been the unfailing 
companion of slavery. 

It might perhaps be admitted that there never were on the face 
of the globe two races so utterly dissimilar and divergent that, if 
sufficient time and favorable occasion w^ere given, they would not 
ultimately assimilate and coalesce; provided always that one of 
them did not exterminate the other before these soothing influ¬ 
ences had had the opportunity to produce their effect. But when 
we recall how many centuries it required to assimilate and coal¬ 
esce the Normans and Saxons, two nations of comparatively very 
slight divergence; when we recall the wars, the feuds, the dis¬ 
sensions, the barbarities, brutalities and suffering which England 
underwent before this process of fraternization was comiDleted, it 
would certainly seem that in an extreme case of divergence as be¬ 
tween extermination and this kind of reconciliation, the former 
were the more agreeable alternative. 

It hardly seems necessary to seriously discuss the proposition 
that internal harmony is essential to a nation’s prosperity and 
perpetuity. The problems of government are sufficiently vast 
and varied already, without adding to them this most difficult of 
all the tasks of statesmanship, the reconciliation of conflicting 
elements at home. The disintegration of empires has almost 
invariably followed the lines of non-assimilation, and no wdse 
statesman would unnecessarily increase them. 

We now come to the consideration of the causes of non-assimi¬ 
lation. This is not the proper place to discuss the question as 
to what have been the influences of country, climate, tempera¬ 
ture, etc., etc., in separating men into different races, nor do I 
care now to enter into any examination as to how far the existing 
and differing types may be considered as the result of evolution 
from a common germ under different conditions of environment. 
Assuming this to be the case, however, it might be that some 
of these varying types have now reached a point of development 


3 


where the distance from the mother germ has become so great, 
and the individuality of the different types has become so dis¬ 
tinct, that assimilation between them is now impossible, just as 
it has become impossible to graft one distinct fruit upon another 
and procure an enduring progeny. 

I propose rather to restrict myself to the mention of a few of 
the more prominent causes of non-asssimilation, selecting those 
whose workings are familiar to us all, either as matter of history 
or as well-known existing influences. First in order are: 

1. Physical Peculiarities. —Why it is that certain peculiarities 
of face, form, and color attract us, while others repel, is a prob¬ 
lem far too deep for this pajjer. It is enough that the fact 
exists; and its importance in this connection will be appreciated 
when we remember that assimilation is impossible without inti¬ 
mate and cordial social relations between the differing races, and 
frequent inter-marriage between their members. 

Again, these physical peculiarities tend to make other and less 
important divergencies conspicuous, and in this and other ways 
are constantly operating to isolate the race possessing them from 
all other races. I am inclined to think that physical peculiarities 
which now pass unnoticed might, if a prejudice w’ere aroused 
against them, ultimately result in the separation and isolation of 
new races and septs now unknown. For example, suppose that 
red-headed men were rigidly excluded from general society, and 
compelled to consort together; the result would be, that in a few 
generations we should have a red-headed sept. The auburn 
tinge would graduall}^ disappear from our heads, while it would 
grow more and more pronounced on theirs, until, after aeons of 
ages, it might be, or at least it might be believed, that there were 
mental as well as physical differences between us. 

Upon the whole, I doubt if there is any obstacle in the way 
of the fraternization of races so difficult to overcome as this one 
of physical peculiarities, and the prejudices, sometimes very idle 
and senseless, wdiich are begotten of them. These marked dif¬ 
ferences in color and physiognomy will remain forever, unless 
gradually modified and softened down by the slow process of 
amalgamation. But there can be no amalgamation worth con- 


4 


sidering as long as the presence of these very peculiarities excites 
repulsion. So there would seem to be a dead lock. 

2. Intellectual Differences and Differences of Temperament. 
Precisely how much of these is to be referred to congenital 
peculiarities, and how much to education and circumstances of 
environment, it is, of course, difficult to determine. We say the 
Englishman is remarkable for his solidity, the Frenchman for his 
vivacity; that the German is thoughtful but lymphatic, the 
Spaniard grave but courteous; but how much of this is fancy 
and how much has a solid foundation, is a question hardly 
worthy enquiring into now. So much, however, is at least clear, 
that there are certain national peculiarities of disposition and 
habits of thought in the different races which exert a powerful 
influence in keeping them separate. It is true that history shows 
that these influences have generally lost their power after gene¬ 
rations of contact and association. A civilized race will not 
assimilate with a barbarian race; but it may civilize the barbarian 
first, and assimilate with him afterwards. 

Another interesting feature in this connection is, that in order 
to establish a complete sympathy between the members of dif¬ 
ferent races, they must unite on the same ideal standard of 
excellence. It is not enough that the one imitates the other, for 
he may imitate without respect, or assume a resemblance for 
purposes of self interest. We are all struggling more or less 
earnestly toward an ideal. Our ideas of right and wu'ong are 
based on our conceptions of what our ideal would consider 
right or wrong. Of course we are but caricatures of that ideal. 
But whenever we meet with those wdiose standard is substantially 
the same as our own, we find that our aims are constantly con¬ 
verging. There is a subtle sympathy established between us, 
which enables us to unconsciously understand each other. I 
think, therefore, that this identity of ideal standards is one of 
the most powerful agents of conciliation. Men who worship 
the same heroes, and cherish the same aspirations, must, sooner 
or later, find themselves on the same plane. 

Another important cause of non-assimilation is : 


5 


3. Diffeeences in Language. 

To these may be added differences in customs, dress, social 
peculiarities, local prejudices, and the like, all of which exert 
more or less influence in keeping up the separation of the races. 
That these differences may be gradually overcome by time and 
contact is, of course, true. But it may be worth while to remem¬ 
ber that, after centuries of association, there still remains the 
old and apparently irrepressible conflict between the Indo-Ger- 
manic and the Sclavonic Races within the Empire of Austria. 

Another, and common cause of non-assimilation, is : 

4. Hatred Engendered by Conquest, or by Clashing of National 
OR Race Interests. —Examples of race antipathies from this cause 
will readily suggest themselves. From the very nature of the 
cause the antagonism created by it will naturally grow less with 
succeeding generations ; and instances are not wanting where 
it has finally died out altogether. But no species of national or 
race antagonism is so dangerous, so desperate, or so prolific of 
dissension and bloodshed while it lasts. 

A fifth cause of non-assimilation is : 

5. Religious Fanaticism. —No better evidence can be given of 
the power of this influence in keeping races separate than the 
fact that, in several instances, it has been able to reconcile races 
otherwise antagonistic. Next tq physical peculiarities, it is 
probably the strongest of all the agencies we have so far con¬ 
sidered. It would seem that it is not essential that a nation 
should be united in favor of a creed, as were the Mahomedans ; 
the same force is operating when the nation is united against a 
religion, as were the Chinese. The im230ssibility of assimilation, 
when this jiowerful force is working against it, may be seen to¬ 
day in British India. It is idle to expect fraternization among 
men of different races when one considers the bare touch of the 
other as an ineffaceable jirofanation. 

Having now briefly considered some of the causes of non¬ 
assimilation, we can better understand the bitter antagonism 
which it has called forth. 


6 


Even if historical examples were wholly wanting, it seems to 
me that the principle might be deduced a priori; for the world 
is full of individual antagonisms. The struggle for existence, 
the competition for the prizes of life, is continually impinging us 
one upon the other. The baser passions of our nature, envy, 
jealousy, covetousness, hatred, are constantly stimulated by our 
own failures or our neighbor’s successes. I can hardly be expected 
to look with equanimity upon my rival who has won, or rest 
complacently in the consciousness that I have lost. But these 
individual repulsions are largely counteracted by individual attrac¬ 
tions. I do not love my competitor; but his brother is my friend, 
or his sister is my sweetheart. This man has done me a grievous 
wrong ; but I condone his fault, not out of regard for him, but 
out of pity for his family, out of sympathy for his relatives. 
Thus do the ramifications of our social system protect us one 
against the other, and unite us with a bond elastic but strong, 
invisible but all-pervading. 

But race antagonisms have no such counteracting influ¬ 
ences. On the contrary, we are prone to generalize the 
fault of the individual culprit, and attach its stigma to the 
whole nation to which he belongs. A Chinese servant runs 
off with my spoons; I hasten to vociferate that all China¬ 
men will steal. An Indian horse-trader tells me a falsehood; 
I feel safe to say that no Indian ever told the truth. Worse than 
this, the sin committed against me is taken up by my race as a 
sin committed against our whole family, and individual crimes 
are thus catalogued into national grievances. This sort of race 
hostility is materially strengthened by a large class of men who 
find their principal scope for activity in keeping alive race feel¬ 
ing and fostering race enmities. It is a curious fact, that 
there are many men who are never so happy as when they 
can merge their own personalities in a great aggregate. They 
prefer to be fractions of a large integer rather than inde¬ 
pendent individual units. Thus I have known people who 
should be reckoned as Masons rather than as men, as Odd 
Fellows rather than as individuals. I have known others who 
were so completely absorbed and lost in a church that scarcely 


7 


the “ nominis umbra ” remained. To them the community is 
everything, the individual is nothing. Insult them and you may 
be forgiven, but insult their sept and you have committed an 
unpardonable sin. Lost in such a generalization, they become 
morbidly sensitive as to the community’s honor, fretfully irrita- 
able as to its grievances, and inordinately jealous of its rivals 
or competitors. For such small cattle, they are capable of a 
great deal of harm. 

I may now re-state the proposition with which I began and 
give it place as the major premise of my argument. 

Two non-assimilating races cannot live together harmoniously on 
the same soil unless one he in a slate of servitude to the other. 

It is not necessary to say that slavery is in this country no 
longer possible. 

We are now ready for the minor premise: 

The Caucasian and Mongolian races are non-assimilating races. 

For, first, they are separated by physical peculiarities of the 
most marked and distinctive character. The Chinaman differs 
from us in color, in features and in size. Ilis contact excites in 
us, or at least in most of us, an unconquerable repulsion which 
it seems to me must ever prevent any intimate association or mis¬ 
cegenation of the races. To this must be added that the differ¬ 
ence in physical peculiarities makes the more conspicuous the 
many and radical divergencies which otherwise exist. 

Second, the two races are also separated by a remarkable di¬ 
vergence in intellectual character and disposition. Our habits 
of thought are so entirely different that it seems impossible that 
they should ever become reconciled. 

Of the European immigration which comes, to us the Indo- 
Germanic races and even the Sclavonic races may be said to have 
in general about the same ideal standard of excellence as our 
own. As a consequence we have found that they readily assim¬ 
ilate with us and their national peculiarities and race distinctions 
soon die out and in a generation or two they become completely 
Americanized. But as far as we can judge, the ideal standard of 


8 


ilie Chinaman is constructed on an entirely different plan. His 
Motions of right and wrong are in many respects totally unlike 
jars. His views in regard to the treatment of women are utterly 
repugnant to us. His heartlessness and inhumanity toward the 
infirm, the feeble and afflicted of his own race shock every sensi¬ 
bility of our nature. He is generally honest, it is true, but the 
most prominent Chinese merchant in San Francisco admitted 
that his race was honest simply because it was the best policy 
and for no other reason. Now a man who is honest from the 
mere force of logic, simply because honesty is generally the best 
policy, must inevitably be dishonest in the exceptional case when 
dishonesty is the best policy. 

The two races are further separated by fundamental differences 
in language, in dress, in customs, in habits and social peculiari¬ 
ties and prejudices. In all these respects the Chinese differ from 
us more than any known race. Even their virtues are not the 
same as ours. While they are as a nation more apprehensive of 
danger than we and more selfish and cowardl}” in avoiding it, 
in the presence of death they display a rare intrepidity and yield 
up their lives with a courage which we should consider heroic 
in one of ourselves. They excel us in industry and economy 
but they are even more reckless and prodigal when they choose 
to indulge themselves. Those of their amusements which are 
innocent seem to us puerile; those which are vicious are even 
more vicious and degrading than our own. 

It is notorious that women and children are regularly bought 
and sold in the Chinese quarter of San Francisco to-day, and 
that young girls are systematically imported from China, and 
held in slavery for purposes of prostitution, within calling dis¬ 
tance of the City Hall. 

A formal contract upon red paper, in which a young Chinese 
girl was bound to serve ivUfi her body a certain Chinese procuress 
lor a term of years, was some time ago introduced in evidence 
iii one of- our Courts of justice, and having been first proved and 
authenticated, it was translated under oath bv the Rev. Otis 
Gibson, and is now in the hands of the Hon. Horace F. Page, 
at Washington. By the terms of this instrument, this girl was 


9 


indentured to serve as a prostitute, just as formally and with as 
much precision and straightforwardness of language as we might 
use in apprenticing a girl to a milliner and careful provision was 
made that she should serve an additional time to make up for 
any sickness resulting from her peculiar occupation. It is 
equally notorious that Chinese bravoes can be readily hired at 
prices which cannot, under the circumstances, be considered as 
exorbitant, who will undertake to maim, or even kill, any other 
Chinaman obnoxious to his employer. Murders are constantly 
occurring, which are clearly traceable to this cause, but although 
the perpetrators may be well known, they cannot be brought to 
justice, on account of the prevailing fear that any evidence 
against them will be visited with severe and speedy punishment. 

In my own professional experience, I have repeatedly known 
cases where a Chinese witness would tell the truth to the attor¬ 
ney in the case, but utterly refuse to state it upon the stand. If 
he is nevertheless summoned, and called upon to testify in open 
Court, he avows his utter ignorance of the whole matter. 

Prominent Chinese merchants are constantly complaining that 
a price has been set on their heads, and that their lives are in 
danger from their own countrymen, and in one case within my 
own knowledge a Chinese merchant paid a special policeman ten 
dollars per day for several days prior to the departure of the 
China steamer, to go about with him continually, and protect 
him from these hired assassins. Even while he was giving an 
elaborate supper at a Chinese restaurant to other merchants, he 
insisted that his guardian should be at the door and within easy 
call. It was noticeable in this case that the Chinaman was not 
afraid of any personal attack from his enemy himself, but rather 
from bravoes employed by that enemy. 

But I do not wish to enlarge upon this portion of my subject. 
I have endeavored to confine myself to facts within my own 
knowledge, and they can easily be verified. The facts speak 
for themselves. .Summing them all together, they simply amount 
to this: the Chinaman has brought China to America. Travelers 
have enabled us to understand what that is. 

A population so dense as to be over-crowded, our Mongolian 
immigrants bring us all the evils of over-crowding. The China- 


10 


man in America cannot comprehend that there is plenty of space, 
lie has formed a habit of making himself compact and econ¬ 
omizing his room. A hundred Chinamen are quite content in a 
house not big enough for ten of our own race. Their type of 
a sleeping chamber is a sardine box. As a consequence, they 
have developed all the evils engendered by over-crowding and 
too close personal contact. At home, labor is so plentiful that it 
has lost some of its value. The struggle to suport life is so hard 
and so engrossing that it leaves no time to elevate or glorify it. 
Selfishness rises to a science. Men come to disregard the pains 
and cares of others. “Individual Altroism” is even more unintel¬ 
ligible to them than it is to us. On the other hand, industry and 
economy are exalted, because the lack of them means starvation. 

There is nothing in their religion or in their education to 
counteract or ameliorate these tendencies. Their religion is 
rationalism run to decay. Their education isprincipally directed 
to forms and ceremonies. In fact, their civilization is so ancient 
that it has become rotten. 

Thus the Chinaman has brought to us and planted within our 
border all the vicious practices and evil tendencies of his home, 
aggravated somewhat, perhaps, by the circumstance that he has 
lost what little restraint his home government imposed upon 
him, without submitting to the restraint of ours. 

I do not doubt that this condition of things might be very 
greatly improved by wise and careful legislation, and by stead¬ 
fast and conscientious teaching. But we are not a nation of 
teachers, and there are millions of pupils ready to come. In 
the meantime, the deluge. 

Again, assimilation is rendered more difficult in this case by 
the very fact that the Chinese are in their way a civilized and not 
a barbarous race. Barbarism is much more easil}^ assimilated to 
and absorbed in civilization than is a divergent civilization. For 
the first lesson which the barbarian learns from his contact with 
civilization is that the civilized man can do more with less mate¬ 
rials and in less time than he can himself. He sees that civiliza¬ 
tion is an advantage. He naturally seeks to acquire it for him¬ 
self, and in acquiring it, he necessarily assimilates himself more 
or less to the race from which he learns it. 


11 




I never shall forg'et the time when I first became convinced of 
the truth of this proposition. Several years ago when the great 
eclipse of the sun occurred, which you all remember, I was living 
at Austin in the State of Nevada. I had just come out of my 
house with a piece of smoked glass in my hand when I noticed 
a Shoshonee Indian intently looking up into the sky. The day 
had been very bright. Suddenly an invisible veil seemed to 
cover the sun; a luminous pall fell upon the mountains and the 
valleys, softening the rugged outlines of. the one and dimming 
the long distances of the other. Great vague shadows seemed 
to have dropped down into the canons and gulches around us, 
where it had been dazzlingly bright but a moment before. Con¬ 
scious of some great mystery, but utterly ignorant of its nature, 
the Indian stood with his eyes searching the cloudless sky. I 
handed him my bit of smoked glass and motioned to him to look 
at the sun. He did so, and when I asked him what he thought 
of it, he heaved a deep sigh and said, “Whitee man heap sabee." 
Continuing down the street with my bit of smoked glass still in 
my Tiand, I happened on a Chinese laundryman. I offered 
him my smoked glass, and advised him to look at the sun. But 
John only grinned complacently, and said, “ IJp my house got 
heap big tub water; you see ’em ‘ clip ’ heap better.” I went 
home and got out my own tub of water and found that John was 
quite right. I could see the “ clip ” a heap better. I have al¬ 
ways felt that I ought to have passed to John the laurels I had 
just undeservedly received and said, ‘‘Chinaman heap sabee.” 
It seemed to me then, as it seems to me now, that in many 
branches of knowledge the Chinaman is as far advanced as we 
are, and it is precisely because he does not need our help that I 
think him less likely to adopt our ways. 

Before leaving this branch of the subject, I desire to put in 
evidence the history of the Chinese in America, and more partic¬ 
ularly in California, during the last twenty-five years. We are 
all tolerably familiar with it, and it seems to me conclusive on 
two points. 

First—We cannot and will not assimilate with them. 


12 




Second—They have not the remotest inclination to assimilate 
with us. 

If, then, we cannot live harmoniously together with the Chi¬ 
nese, the conclusion is sound that Chinese immigration should 
be prevented. 

Of course, it is understood that my argument is not directed 
against the coming of a few individuals. It is rather against the 
vast hordes who can be spared there and who are ready to come 
here. It is not the present thousands of whom we complain. It 
is the future millions. 

But I am met here with the argument that the prohibition 
of any kind of immigration whatsoever is contrary to the im¬ 
memorial policy of our republic and in the teeth of the most 
noble and memorable utterances of our fathers. 

I take issue on both points. 

It never was the policy of our republic to welcome to our 
shores a class of immigrants who could not or would not assimi¬ 
late with our people, nor was it ever so declared. 

It did so happen that until the Chinese invasion, the class of 
immigrants who came to our shores were, with one exception, 
welcome visitors. They were of races and nationalities with 
which we were in perfect concord and with whom we could read¬ 
ily assimilate. We needed them; they came, and twenty-five 
years after they came, almost all evidence of their foreign birth 
had disappeared. They had become thoroughly assimilated to 
us, and amalgamated with us, and were as much Americanized 
as if born on the soil. 

But there was one exception. That exception was the African 
Negro. His coming was bitterly regretted by every one of our 
early statesmen who ever spoke of it. If you doubt this, exam¬ 
ine the list of members of the African Colonization Society. The 
pages shine with eminent names. But the negro did come, 
and we just barely survived his coming. Is it worth while to 
repeat the mistake? 

A strange notion seems to have become prevalent in the 
Eastern States that the opposition to Chinese immigra¬ 
tion is mainly based upon the fact that the Chinese are gen- 


13 


erally more industrious and economical than ourselves. No 
less distinguished a writer than Greorge W. Curtis has de¬ 
nounced the movement as a crusade against the two virtues 
of industry and economy. Perhaps some of the speeches made 
on this coast may have given color to such an imputation. 
But its falsity is readily seen when we consider that no one thinks 
of opposing Scandinavian immigration, although the Scandinavian 
is, as a general rule, full as industrious and economical as the 
Chinaman. But the Scandinavian is in sympathy with us. He 
readily accepts our government, our customs, our habits, and 
ways of life. In a few years he becomes as much of an American 
as ourselves, and his devotion to our soil and his attachment to 
our institutions is as warm as our own. 

On the other hand, an immigration of Malay pirates would be 
full as objectionable as the present Chinese immigration, al¬ 
though the Malays have even less industry and economy than 
our own people. We want no race which we cannot absorb. 
Our best immigrants are those whose race distinctions are soon- 
- est obliterated. 

I do not pretend to claim, however, that the opposition to 
Chinese immigration is not made more bitter and intense among 
our laboring classes because the coming of so many Chinese has 
a tendency to derange our labor market and bring about a reduc¬ 
tion in wages. It would be very strange if it did not have this 
effect. We do not expect that a laborer will look with kindly 
feelings upon the man who takes the bread out of the mouth of 
his children, even when that man is his friend or neighbor. It 
is difficult enough at all times to curb the passions of men, who, 
while resisting a reduction in their wages, see their plalbes taken 
by others willing to work for the price they have refused. It 
was not found an easy task last summer in the Eastern States. 
But the task is made very much more difficult when the new¬ 
comers are unwelcome strangers, alien in race, in color, in creed, 
in customs, and in everything but the power to work. This pre¬ 
sents only another bar to the assimilation of the two races, and 
excites still other and very bitter and dangerous antagonisms be— 
tween them. It is no argument to tell the American laborer 
that if he would live as the Chinaman lives he might subsist on 
the Chinaman’s wages. 


14 


It has taken the Chinaman centuries to learn to live on so little. 
With the lapse of time his necessities have gradually accom¬ 
modated themselves to his small earnings, until now very little 
suffices to procure him abundance. He has made a prodigious 
stride toward the ideal ration of a straw per day. Early educa¬ 
tion and constant habit have so led him to practice the closest 
economy, that economy has itself become a habit, and no longer 
involves self-denial. The world about him has graduated itself 
down to his standard. His butcher, his baker, his candlestick 
maker, his manufacturer, his merchant and his common carrier, 
have reduced their prices to suit his measure. The doctor who 
attends his sick, and the priest who buries his dead demand little 
because he gets little. Labor can afford to be cheap when every¬ 
thing else is cheap. But we cannot expect labor to be cheap 
when everything else is dear. 

The Chinaman is what he is because of China; the American 
is what he is because of America. Under the circumstances 
there cannot be a fair competition between them. You cannot 
give the American laborer a long line of Chinese ances¬ 
tors. You cannot give him hereditarj^ tendencies and tastes, 
and instincts and capabilities which his birth never entitled him 
to. You cannot make him over on the Mongolian pattern, 
and give him a Chinese education. 

The truth is, we have taught each other habits that are expen¬ 
sive. We have led each other to believe that it is a good thing 
to promote schools and educate children, to contribute to 
churches and give to hospitals, to eat clean food and wear clean 
clothes. We have encouraged each other to think that over¬ 
crowding leads to immoraliri^, that plenty of air and sunlight are 
necessaries of life, that our old and infirm must be j^roperly 
cared for and kindly treated. Sickness compels expensive phy¬ 
sicians, nurses and medicines, and death brings an expensive 
funeral. Our habits, customs and system of life are modeled 
upon this standard, and it is impossible to change it at once. 
Until it is changed, the Chinaman will always beat us in a com¬ 
petition where the frugal habits he learned in China are pitted 
against the habits we learned in America. Under the circum- 


0 


15 


\ 


stances it is no more surprising that a Chinaman can live cheaper 
than an American than it is that a horse can. 

Bat is it worth while to change our system? While there may 
be many defects in it, still does it not, upon the whole, work 
better than any S 3 ^stem we know of? Suppose that we had an 
immigration of 100 , 000,000 of Chinamen; suppose that their in¬ 
dustry and economy were applied to our land and every acre 
beneficiated to its utmost; suppose that our productions were 
magnified until the possible height was reached—what then? 
Measured by acres, we should be much better off than we are 
now; but, measured by men, should we be any better off? 
Measured by the peace, prosperity, contentedness, cheerfulness, 
happiness of our people, should we have made any progress? I 
think not. 

But I am asked how can this immigration be checked ? The 
power to regulate commerce resides in the National Congress. 
Our Government has made a treaty with China in which the 
right to come here has been granted to her people. The Su¬ 
preme Court of the United States has just decided that no State 
possesses the power of interfering with this immigration. All 
this is true. 

But we have no right to assume that the National Congress 
will not do us justice. Perhaps their refusal to help us—I do 
not understand that they have as 3 ’et refused—is because they 
do not yet understand our grievance. There are many among 
ourselves who are still in favor of Chinese immigration. It has 
even been asserted, and prominent men and journals in the East 
have repeated it, that the opposition to Chinese immigration in 
California is confined to a few demagogues and discontented 
communists. As long as this is believed, there is little hope of 
anything being done. 

I, therefore, make this suggestion; Let the Legislature of Cal¬ 
ifornia, at their next session, provide for taking the sense of the 
people of the State of California on the question of Chinese im¬ 
migration, at a general election to be held for that purpose. Let 
them next request the Legislatures of the other Pacific States to 
adopt a similar measure. I ma^" be mistaken, but I think that 


16 


vote would result in a showing of at least ten to one opposed to 
Chinese immigration. 

Then let the Senators and Representatives from the Pa¬ 
cific Coast in Congress, armed with these credentials, say to 
their brethren of the East: “ The people of the Pacific Coast 
have been so far the only people exposed to Chinese immigra¬ 
tion. They are strongly and bitterly opposed to it. This vote 
is conclusive on that point. They now call upon you for relief. 
If they are wrong you can easily prove it. The treaty with 
China provides that the Chinese may enter all our ports, while 
we are restricted to five of theirs. Make this restriction mutual. 
Amend the treaty and confine the Chinese to the Atlantic j)oi"ts 
If this immigration suits you, you are welcome to it.” 

The proposal seems to me a fair one. 




* -T, -'V ^ -J' ^ 

' • : -C'" ■ ' ' 

f I V * - 


J - .4''^'5-'''^V''--- a IBhHIiv ■' 

'■-“ ’ -'^-v ■-•' .‘aw IsSS^fS^,, 




.■ S&; ^i-t' 






-'. / X _ ^ iT ''*h* 


• ^ - M 



.^i! ! 


*-t'; r 


' • ■' ■ * \ ^’v' -j -_■ ‘ c: 

: -■■.■j}~''l _ ^ V v‘ V 




‘W!s^- 




'- Si 


--'■ , MWwPilpl.^^'va ;-t\ , -'>‘-^ (-h- ‘ ^ V *“’ w.., 




'»■ ;* , Bb 'T»jL_L 

*»V|. 




■- - ■ r r-^ 

4i^r' ^ _;*- 

r.__-x»-_ * ■ <j'“ 4 i* * 

■ tO ^’•■r: I ’*• ' • ^ .:» 
iSf 1^‘*v‘'"^■ «. ■ t~ .iET '* 

•/ i 7' - ♦. Sr 


r. •_ . . ;. y. - 


^ - lA, 






















• 5 1 ^ ^ « 

1 ^ _• j • 


I 


t*i 

•r ai 



^\'r 



«x 




I > 

F» 


(r. 


* - s 

•t 




f"'- 


w 



C3: ' 
i 




. ^ 

: if 


) 


'r-'iC-. -I 


« 'i 




'in 




» 




."xi 


I 



> 


LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



■; 0 021 866 760 0 


4^ 


** ■ • 


• V 





y -. 


I* 

»♦ 


' *i’ 




*V\’„ 


■'• Jr-iT' ■ ' 

■'’^v 




‘V vr* -V- -r * 




f'-. 






4 

tt *<• 




■4 I 

« 


VJ 











